click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
with the deputy secretary of state william burns ahead of tomorrow's historic u.n. general assembly vote on palestinian statehood. the resolution, though, would upgrade the palestinian authority's u.n. status from observer to a nonmember observer state. it is expected to be approved. israel strongly opposes the bid. the person representing the u.s. will be ambassador susan rice who currently is facing a lot of heat over the statements she made about the benghazi attack. will the fire she's facing in washington impact her role in this delicate diplomatic dance at the u.n.? >> i don't think so. these are two different issues. she reps the united states at the u.n., i don't think anybody questions the fact she reps the united states when she's up there. she serves as the president's envoy up there. her standing there is not affected by what's going on here at all. i think what is -- what you see is questions that still exist about benghazi and libya, and i think those will be sorted out. i mean, the end of the day, you know, the fact is what's going on in libya is something that we all have
with senators john mccain and lindsey graham along with the u.n. ambassador susan rice. the three senators emerged from the meeting saying they were honored by the fact that the cia director would meet with them, just three random senators and not in some official capacity testifying before committee on the hill. they appreciated the fact that the administration and the intelligence community was going to such lengths to e swaj their concerns to personally answer their questions about the libya attack in a closed-door meeting with the cia director himself, even though these are just three random senators. the senators said their questions were answered as reasonably could be expected and they were willing to consider the president's nominee for secretary of state. they were tlog hear out those nominations fairly and without prejudice. yeah right. that's not the way it went. here's actually what happened after that meeting today. >> we're not going to consider this nomination until we get answers to our concerns. we're not even close to getting t the basic answers. >> we're e troubled by ma
. citracal slow release. >>> after a trio of skeptical republican senators voiced their troubles with u.n. ambassador susan rice's answers yesterday another top gop lawmaker senator susan collins went there today. >> what troubles me so much is the benghazi attack in many ways echos the attacks on those embassies in 1998 when susan rice was head of the african region for our state department. >> we discuss the latest chapter in the republican crusades when luke russert joins us next on "now." [ male announcer ] considering all your mouth goes through, do you really think brushing is enough to keep it clean? while brushing misses germs in 75% of your mouth, listerine® cleans virtually your entire mouth. so take your oral health to a whole new level. listerine®... power to your mouth™. i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call a
ambassador to the u.n. what about what's going on in the u.n. this week? with the palestinians looking to have their status -- there's an entire agenda. the idea that we're focusing on one set of talking points is ridiculous. >> i know you to be a pretty nonpartisan guy, do you smell anything fishy with this benghazi investigation or the way it was handled? do you sense any incompetence? because if you talk to john mccain or lindsey graham, you ask the question, are we talking about a cover-up or general inconfidence? >> the idea was, why did they turn down the all the added security? why did the ambassador go without adequate security? that's a real issue. why were these decisions made? the question, then, of the talking points, what did the cia provide, why was the intelligence community late in apparently getting the points right? it's not the first time we've seen things like that. it's worth looking at. but the idea that a month later, we're still focusing on this rather than basic questions of foreign policy on how to deal with terrorism in these areas. seems to me we are missing
they go after the u.n. ambassador, apparently because they think she's an easy target? then they've got a problem with me. and should i choose, if i think that she would be the best person to serve america, in the capacity the state department that i would nominate her. >> are these republicans painting the president into a corner where he almost has to nominate her? >> they might and susan rice should send john mccain some flowers and thank him for this behavior, but the president's answer says why this is a good fight for him. if he takes them on over this, that is a win-win for this president because he will have a lot of people behind him, both in terms of public sentiment. we've got new polls today that suggests that where as people aren't quite thrilled with how the matter has been handled, they don't think the intention was to mislead the american people and other members of the senate have started to distance themselves from what i think is the three newest members of the bat crazy party. she went out and uses talking points not designed to mislead the american people, but were
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)